News On F1 Forums - Talk Formula 1

F1greyhound wrote:No F1-NUT, MICHAEL really is NOT ruthless etc. He is a 100% racer with 100% ability. Apart from that he is one of the fairest sportsmen ever to grace F1, at all times being able to admit the skills of his competitors and always denying others to call him the best.

So explain to me how fair knocking Damon Hill off the road to win his first championship was particularly, and exactly how did he grace F1, by doing this? In my book he cheated - and took the shine forever away from his talent. And once a cheat, always a cheat. I don't think there is anybody who believes that 'accident' was not a deliberate attempt to take Damon out. The man has fantastic skill and commitment, but he's not a fair player. You either can live with that or not - but don't pretend that having 100% commitment and 100% racing ability is any excuse for being as ruthless as he was and is. I've never forgiven him for that manouvre and, I suspect, there are thousands of others who also haven't. It told us everything about the man - I'm English so a sense of fair play is very important, not as important as winning to Schuie though.

Now, did Irvine's wheel go missing by accident on that vital Ferrari pitstop which robbed him of the championship (the one he would have got before Schuie) or did Schumacher have a hand in it? If I didn't know what an underhand player this man is, I'd say no way. It's seems so improbable, but you have to consider the lengths this man will go with his 100% commitment you relish so much.

Again - respect his talent, but he's a cheat. Maybe that's what you have to be to be a winner, but I prefer pure driving talent, and ability to motivate your crew and team. If that means you're an also ran, so be it. Cheating is cheating, whether it be in an exam or on the track.

F1-NUT wrote:

F1greyhound wrote:No F1-NUT, MICHAEL really is NOT ruthless etc. He is a 100% racer with 100% ability. Apart from that he is one of the fairest sportsmen ever to grace F1, at all times being able to admit the skills of his competitors and always denying others to call him the best.

So explain to me how fair knocking Damon Hill off the road to win his first championship was particularly, and exactly how did he grace F1, by doing this? In my book he cheated - and took the shine forever away from his talent. And once a cheat, always a cheat. I don't think there is anybody who believes that 'accident' was not a deliberate attempt to take Damon out. The man has fantastic skill and commitment, but he's not a fair player. You either can live with that or not - but don't pretend that having 100% commitment and 100% racing ability is any excuse for being as ruthless as he was and is. I've never forgiven him for that manouvre and, I suspect, there are thousands of others who also haven't. It told us everything about the man - I'm English so a sense of fair play is very important, not as important as winning to Schuie though.

Now, did Irvine's wheel go missing by accident on that vital Ferrari pitstop which robbed him of the championship (the one he would have got before Schuie) or did Schumacher have a hand in it? If I didn't know what an underhand player this man is, I'd say no way. It's seems so improbable, but you have to consider the lengths this man will go with his 100% commitment you relish so much.

Again - respect his talent, but he's a cheat. Maybe that's what you have to be to be a winner, but I prefer pure driving talent, and ability to motivate your crew and team. If that means you're an also ran, so be it. Cheating is cheating, whether it be in an exam or on the track.

F1-NUT wrote: So explain to me how fair knocking Damon Hill off the road to win his first championship was particularly, and exactly how did he grace F1, by doing this? In my book he cheated - and took the shine forever away from his talent. And once a cheat, always a cheat. I don't think there is anybody who believes that 'accident' was not a deliberate attempt to take Damon out. The man has fantastic skill and commitment, but he's not a fair player. You either can live with that or not - but don't pretend that having 100% commitment and 100% racing ability is any excuse for being as ruthless as he was and is. I've never forgiven him for that manouvre and, I suspect, there are thousands of others who also haven't. It told us everything about the man - I'm English so a sense of fair play is very important, not as important as winning to Schuie though.

Now, did Irvine's wheel go missing by accident on that vital Ferrari pitstop which robbed him of the championship (the one he would have got before Schuie) or did Schumacher have a hand in it? If I didn't know what an underhand player this man is, I'd say no way. It's seems so improbable, but you have to consider the lengths this man will go with his 100% commitment you relish so much.

Again - respect his talent, but he's a cheat. Maybe that's what you have to be to be a winner, but I prefer pure driving talent, and ability to motivate your crew and team. If that means you're an also ran, so be it. Cheating is cheating, whether it be in an exam or on the track.

Hmm..not today..not in the mood...just resigned from my job..going to the bar

F1-NUT wrote:
So explain to me how fair knocking Damon Hill off the road to win his first championship was particularly, and exactly how did he grace F1, by doing this? In my book he cheated - and took the shine forever away from his talent. And once a cheat, always a cheat.

JENSONs going from pole, a great start to the weekend....sayingthis the RENAULTs are on his heels and HONDA must not make the slightest mistake in strategy not to spoil the 1st victory.

Re.MICHAEL vs. DAMON, a position keeping manoeuvre. It has been widely acclaimed that A) MICHAEL at this moment probably didnt know his car was done as it was immediately after his accident and B) it was a premature attempt by DAMON in the first place. AND C) it was MICHAELs year of total supremacy artificially cut short by desperate FIA decisions to ban him for GPs and disqualify him after the Spa victory for b0110cks. He was going to win the sason by min.30 points in the second best car.

I would agree the move against JAQUES wasnt 100% correct but again many of these passes go wrong when someone tries to dive in half on the grass and the other driver does not get punished.

If you ever drove a race you might know how hard it is to let your competitors pass. 100s of these manoeuvres happened in F1 but hardly ever got someone blamed the way MICHAEL did. AYRTON never got this bad publicity after taking out his teammate ALAIN to secure a Championship, in fact this was regarded as clever and skilled. And here it was much more evident than the MICHAEL-DAMON thing. AYRTON pulled all kinds of tricks on ALAIN and never got that bad publicity either while I heard never anyone complainig GERHARD would have been a second rate teammate letting AYRTON have all the success even though the situation was like MICHAEL-RUBENS(NELSON, JOHNNY, EDDIE).

Finally to think FERRARI would have thrown away EDDIEs WDC on MICHAELs demand is totally insane. But if it makes you feel better you can think whatever you like....



GO JENSON!!!

F1-NUT wrote:

F1greyhound wrote:No F1-NUT, MICHAEL really is NOT ruthless etc. He is a 100% racer with 100% ability. Apart from that he is one of the fairest sportsmen ever to grace F1, at all times being able to admit the skills of his competitors and always denying others to call him the best.

...

Again - respect his talent, but he's a cheat. Maybe that's what you have to be to be a winner, but I prefer pure driving talent, and ability to motivate your crew and team. If that means you're an also ran, so be it. Cheating is cheating, whether it be in an exam or on the track. [/color]

I totally agree with F1-Nut. Michael Schumacher ruined his greatest in my book by continually losing it like this.

In 1994, he had to crash Hill out to keep from losing the championship in Australia. If memory serves me, He was leading and Damon was 2nd. Damon needed to finish 3rd to take the championship. Then disaster struck. Michael overcooked it going into the chicane before the pit straight. He hit the outside wall, and his race was effectively over which would've meant Hill wins. He coasted until Damon entered the blind chicane whereupon he purposely and unnecessarily drove into the center of the track unexpectedly causing Damon to hit him. I have this race on tape, and it makes me angry everytime I see it.

In 1997, he did exactly the same thing to Jacques Villeneuve in Spain only JV's Williams was not terminally damaged. This caused him to be disqualified for the season!

In 1999, after breaking his leg in England and missing half the season, he came back into the team and had to continue his own championship run instead of supporting Eddie Irvine who could've won it.

Why does someone this talented have to resort to this kind of crap? Senna and Prost ruined their copybooks with similar shananigans. The difference was it was personal between the two of them. I believe Senna's story in 1989 that Prost had lost that corner but turned in causing the accident which destroyed Senna's mathematical chances to win the WC. Unfortunately Senna titted for tat and crashed Prost out the following year despite the fact that Prost would've had to win the final two races with Senna not finishing to win the WC in 1990.

Damon Hill, Jacques Villeneuve, Mika Hakkinen and Alonso [so far] have been much greater world champions despite the stats.



Chris

RE30B#16 I checked the date on your post and it was the 2nd, so I'll take it seriously. I've bitten my tongue so often on this incident that I'll need a blood transfusion soon so its time to respond.

RE30B#16 wrote:If memory serves me, He was leading and Damon was 2nd. Damon needed to finish 3rd to take the championship. .

So far you?ve got it right

RE30B#16 wrote:Then disaster struck. Michael overcooked it going into the chicane before the pit straight.

Yes Michael overcooked it, but not at the chicane before pit straight, which doesn?t exist. He went off at East Terrace Corner, a fairly tight 90degree left hander 5 turns after pit straight.

RE30B#16 wrote:He hit the outside wall, and his race was effectively over which would've meant Hill wins.

Michael hit the wall almost perfectly side on and almost 'bounced' off it, without any apparent damage, and immediately recovered onto the track, there is no evidence that his race was over.

RE30B#16 wrote: He coasted until Damon entered the blind chicane

This "blind chicane" is in thes ame place as the one you previously mentioned, i.e. nowhere. Your facts are so wrong I wonder if we are talking about the same incident.

Damon Hill did not see Michael go off but was close enough that he came around East Terrace corner just as Michael was recovering onto the track. Michael was never at any stage coasting.

The corner after East Terrace is Flinders St, between the two is a short straight. The V8?s don?t change gear on this straight, maybe the F1?s did, I don?t know, but the point is its very short. Damon, seeing Michael recovering onto the inside of the track going into Flinders Street corner, assumes that Michael is going to try an protect the inside. So Damon heads for the outside.

Michael, the racing genius that he is, outthinks Damon and also moves to the outside, in a direct line from his recovery point, no swerving involved. Damon finds Michael in front of him and briefly locks up his brakes avoiding running into the back of him.

Now I would like everyone to take a big deep breath and consider the following. They are both now in the braking zone for Flinders Street corner, a fairly tight 90 degree right hander. They are both on the racing line, Damon is directly behind Michael and travelling at the same speed after Damon?s lockup. I put it to you that it is impossible to make an acceptable pass from this position.

RE30B#16 wrote: whereupon he purposely and unnecessarily drove into the center of the track unexpectedly causing Damon to hit him.

We are always told that Michael turned in on Damon. This is completely incorrect, he was turning because he was going round a corner, at no point did Michael deviate 1mm from the racing line.

Damon, frustrated at missing the opportunity to get past, makes a ludicrous lunge down the inside. There was no way he was going to make the corner. Maybe Michael should have yielded and let Damon go straight into the tyre barriers. Instead Michael took his rightful racing line through the corner. Damon, completely locked up and ploughing straight ahead, goes into the side of Michael. Michaels right rear goes over Damon?s front left, Michael nearly lands on his head, and Damon?s front suspension is wrecked.

RE30B#16 wrote: I have this race on tape,

Are you sure, because most of what you say is completely wrong.

RE30B#16 wrote:and it makes me angry everytime I see it.

It makes me angry every time I hear the misinformation that surrounds this incident. We always hear about how stoic Damon and Sir Frank didn?t comment after the incident. You know why they didn?t comment? Because they knew the incident was Damon?s fault, and to say any different would be lying. Instead they have a couple of digs at Michaels character and everybody else who are already predisposed against Michael buys the line that Michael tried to drive Damon off the road, time and time again we hear it from all the Michael-haters on this forum, when in fact it was the other way around.

Jerez ?97 , now that was a different story, and maybe Michael deserves his flawed reputation on the basis of that incident, but if he does, then Senna should be cast in the same light.

Cheers, Redhead

Redhead wrote:RE30B#16 I checked the date on your post and it was the 2nd, so I'll take it seriously. I've bitten my tongue so often on this incident that I'll need a blood transfusion soon so its time to respond.

RE30B#16 wrote:If memory serves me, He was leading and Damon was 2nd. Damon needed to finish 3rd to take the championship. .

So far you?ve got it right

RE30B#16 wrote:Then disaster struck. Michael overcooked it going into the chicane before the pit straight.

Yes Michael overcooked it, but not at the chicane before pit straight, which doesn?t exist. He went off at East Terrace Corner, a fairly tight 90degree left hander 5 turns after pit straight.

RE30B#16 wrote:He hit the outside wall, and his race was effectively over which would've meant Hill wins.

Michael hit the wall almost perfectly side on and almost 'bounced' off it, without any apparent damage, and immediately recovered onto the track, there is no evidence that his race was over.

RE30B#16 wrote: He coasted until Damon entered the blind chicane

This "blind chicane" is in thes ame place as the one you previously mentioned, i.e. nowhere. Your facts are so wrong I wonder if we are talking about the same incident.

Damon Hill did not see Michael go off but was close enough that he came around East Terrace corner just as Michael was recovering onto the track. Michael was never at any stage coasting.

The corner after East Terrace is Flinders St, between the two is a short straight. The V8?s don?t change gear on this straight, maybe the F1?s did, I don?t know, but the point is its very short. Damon, seeing Michael recovering onto the inside of the track going into Flinders Street corner, assumes that Michael is going to try an protect the inside. So Damon heads for the outside.

Michael, the racing genius that he is, outthinks Damon and also moves to the outside, in a direct line from his recovery point, no swerving involved. Damon finds Michael in front of him and briefly locks up his brakes avoiding running into the back of him.

Now I would like everyone to take a big deep breath and consider the following. They are both now in the braking zone for Flinders Street corner, a fairly tight 90 degree right hander. They are both on the racing line, Damon is directly behind Michael and travelling at the same speed after Damon?s lockup. I put it to you that it is impossible to make an acceptable pass from this position.

RE30B#16 wrote: whereupon he purposely and unnecessarily drove into the center of the track unexpectedly causing Damon to hit him.

We are always told that Michael turned in on Damon. This is completely incorrect, he was turning because he was going round a corner, at no point did Michael deviate 1mm from the racing line.

Damon, frustrated at missing the opportunity to get past, makes a ludicrous lunge down the inside. There was no way he was going to make the corner. Maybe Michael should have yielded and let Damon go straight into the tyre barriers. Instead Michael took his rightful racing line through the corner. Damon, completely locked up and ploughing straight ahead, goes into the side of Michael. Michaels right rear goes over Damon?s front left, Michael nearly lands on his head, and Damon?s front suspension is wrecked.

RE30B#16 wrote: I have this race on tape,

Are you sure, because most of what you say is completely wrong.

RE30B#16 wrote:and it makes me angry everytime I see it.

It makes me angry every time I hear the misinformation that surrounds this incident. We always hear about how stoic Damon and Sir Frank didn?t comment after the incident. You know why they didn?t comment? Because they knew the incident was Damon?s fault, and to say any different would be lying. Instead they have a couple of digs at Michaels character and everybody else who are already predisposed against Michael buys the line that Michael tried to drive Damon off the road, time and time again we hear it from all the Michael-haters on this forum, when in fact it was the other way around.

Jerez ?97 , now that was a different story, and maybe Michael deserves his flawed reputation on the basis of that incident, but if he does, then Senna should be cast in the same light.

Cheers, Redhead

Hi Redhead. We can all have our opninons on what happened, but I strongly disagree. Can I also mention that I am not a 'Michael hater'. I have always respected his driving talent - just not his methods. I will cheer if he, say, puts his car into the wall with an unforced error and then walks into the wrong garage, heh, but will also give him a grudging and respectful nod when he shows his brilliance - a brilliance that is tarnished by the incident with Damon and others.

Now to the crux: I've seen that incident time and time again. You have to be totally doolally if you believe Micheal didn't turn into Damon on purpose. It is a definate manouvre.

And BIG question that you totally fail to address is WHY WAS MICHEAL ON THE RACING LINE AT ALL? I put that in capitals as it's a rather important question that you don't seem to be aware of. You wrote: 'Instead Michael took his rightful racing line through the corner.' Rightful line? Where do you get that idea from? He did not have any right to the racing line. He was not racing!

So why was Michael on the racing line? Simple Answer: he knew Damon was coming up behind him and it was his intention to take him out of the race. Schuie's race and championship hopes were over. He SHOULD NOT have been on the racing line at all - just what was he thinking - but we know what he was thinking really, don't we? Damon comes along and finds Schuie with a problem on the racing line. He didn't dart down the inside, he just expected the crippled Schumacher to RIGHTLY yield the line. Damon has the right to racing line because he's RACING!!!!!!! Maybe he was naive in believeing Schumacher wouldn't try something like that, but that just shows his quality and sense of fair play.

So who is at fault here - Damon, who has no problem until he encounters the crippled Michael, or Schumacher, who should have at least let him through? Honestly, please love Schumacher as much as you do, but don't fool yourself that the man is not what he is. Just accept it - he will do anything to win! Some peole find that an admirable trait, which is great, but please don't insult our intelligences with this 'It was Damon's fault' argument. I don't think I've ever read anything quite so ridiculas.

You can also see it in Schuie's face as he stands on the pit wall watching the race afterwards, he knew what he'd done. He took a chance and it paid off for him.

This could go on forever and ever I put it to you all that we should let this one go and get on with the season in hand which is quite enough to be going on with If we beat ourselves up about whether or not we like or dislike someone's driving or character it isn't going to change them. So we need to deal with objective things as often as possible and let the subjective things remain just that and don't dwell or them or they'll eat us up

As the Bonzo's once said 'lets make up and be friendly'

THANKS REDHEAD!!!

I agree 101%. As you said neither WILLIAMS nor DAMON commented EVER on the incident, BECAUSE it was DAMONs fault. MICHAEL was still racing and the manoeuvre of DAMON was spontanous and erratic, POINT.

NOBODY(of those dont like the CHAMP guys) is fair enough to also admit that the FIA was doing everything in that season to prevent MICHAELs solo run through the Championship, black flag at Silverstone, 2-race ban, disqualification after the SPA victory. They cut MICHAELs points back by at least 30 points artificially producing this final race match. DAMON was a fine driver but in that year he wouldnt have been in the fight for the title without the FIA support. And I wouldnt care if they did it on purpose or subconsciously. BUT THEY DID IT.

The JEREZ manoeuvre was a foul but one conducted 100 times. Mostly an F1 driver doesnt like to make room on the inside, and more so if the competitor dives in half on the grass. And in this case the WDC was at stake! JAQUES however won this battle, he rightly won the WDC. MICHAEL was close to win it in the 3rd-4th best car(and by the ignorants this was NOT a great achievement)...


Re. blame on RUBENS, another completely ignorant approach, remember how long JUAN PABLO took to adapt to the MCLAREN. By the way RUBENS did a faster lap in the GP than JENSON who was (rightly!) complaining about the tyres. RUBENS is a top notch driver and if he says his brakes dont work, THEY DONT WORK. Hell be joining JENSON at the top soon...


CHEEERS!!

F1greyhound wrote:THANKS REDHEAD!!!

I agree 101%. As you said neither WILLIAMS nor DAMON commented EVER on the incident, BECAUSE it was DAMONs fault. MICHAEL was still racing and the manoeuvre of DAMON was spontanous and erratic, POINT.

NOBODY(of those dont like the CHAMP guys) is fair enough to also admit that the FIA was doing everything in that season to prevent MICHAELs solo run through the Championship, black flag at Silverstone, 2-race ban, disqualification after the SPA victory. They cut MICHAELs points back by at least 30 points artificially producing this final race match. DAMON was a fine driver but in that year he wouldnt have been in the fight for the title without the FIA support. And I wouldnt care if they did it on purpose or subconsciously. BUT THEY DID IT.

The JEREZ manoeuvre was a foul but one conducted 100 times. Mostly an F1 driver doesnt like to make room on the inside, and more so if the competitor dives in half on the grass. And in this case the WDC was at stake! JAQUES however won this battle, he rightly won the WDC. MICHAEL was close to win it in the 3rd-4th best car(and by the ignorants this was NOT a great achievement)...


Re. blame on RUBENS, another completely ignorant approach, remember how long JUAN PABLO took to adapt to the MCLAREN. By the way RUBENS did a faster lap in the GP than JENSON who was (rightly!) complaining about the tyres. RUBENS is a top notch driver and if he says his brakes dont work, THEY DONT WORK. Hell be joining JENSON at the top soon...


CHEEERS!!

Well, I was standing on the corner, the Ferrari was not going to make another corner, much less another lap, the driver of that disabled car drove it onto the racing line. QED.

FERRARI?

Are you talking of JEREZ? Or were you standing somewhere on the MARS?

Come on, Julian, some good arguments! I thought the 30points steal might have inspirited you to somewhat more....

F1greyhound wrote:FERRARI?

Are you talking of JEREZ? Or were you standing somewhere on the MARS?

Come on, Julian, some good arguments! I thought the 30points steal might have inspirited you to somewhat more....

What arguments! I haven't seen any yet. I thought we were just humouring all you misguided folk who can't see their hero for who he is...

Anyway, here's some vids for a bit of fun

Videos of Incident Damon Hill Incident 94

External:
http://www.freeweb.hu/antisumi/schumhill94.mpg

In car with Damon:
http://www.farzadsf1gallery.com/feature ... /adel4.mpg

Videos of Villeneuve incident 97

External:
http://www.globalserve.net/~trauttf/Jac ... lision.mpg

In car with Schuie:
http://www.globalserve.net/~trauttf/Jac ... _shuey.mpg

You might spot some striking similarities...

I have to say MICHAEL looks even less "guilty" than I thought after replaying those movies several times. Very much a question of angles, but no way he could have reacted differently in Adelaide, no way to see the amount of damage to his car there before DAMON hits him from behind, no way DAMONs move was particularly clever after he saw exactly what happened to MICHAEL with a great chance to pass him a bit later.

In Jerez you have to study the second movie with his own view and you will find JAQUES passing manoevre somewhat weird. Imagine you sitting in MICHAELs car what would you see, and where could you go? Maybe a foul, but a minor one.

Altogether 2 race accidents, you could replay hundreds of these, but then these were WDC decisions and then there is the CHAMP involved, who some of you dont like(for his supremacy?).

F1-NUT, as a racer, would you have honestly taken a different line from MICHAEL?

I dont even want to say DAMONs and JAQUES lines were not understandable, they tried - one without luck and the other with. Thats racing...

F1greyhound wrote:I have to say MICHAEL looks even less "guilty" than I thought after replaying those movies several times. Very much a question of angles, but no way he could have reacted differently in Adelaide, no way to see the amount of damage to his car there before DAMON hits him from behind, no way DAMONs move was particularly clever after he saw exactly what happened to MICHAEL with a great chance to pass him a bit later.

In Jerez you have to study the second movie with his own view and you will find JAQUES passing manoevre somewhat weird. Imagine you sitting in MICHAELs car what would you see, and where could you go? Maybe a foul, but a minor one.

Altogether 2 race accidents, you could replay hundreds of these, but then these were WDC decisions and then there is the CHAMP involved, who some of you dont like(for his supremacy?).

F1-NUT, as a racer, would you have honestly taken a different line from MICHAEL?

I dont even want to say DAMONs and JAQUES lines were not understandable, they tried - one without luck and the other with. Thats racing...

Dream on...